Phenomenal stuff. I'll probably calm down tomorrow but right now my heart's beating like crazy and my brain's screaming it's a bloody masterpiece. This is one of the few movies that I didn't try to control my expectations beforehand and it still surpassed them in many ways.

"Power over spice is power over all"- that kinda turned out to be a lie at the end. As The movie starts, I felt an immediate sense of tension through its score. It's a cinematic experience; I can't imagine feeling the same lying at home in bed, watching in headphones. The resonating vibrations as the sounds reverberate through the theater created an epic atmosphere.

When Part One came out people said it was "game of thrones in space", I wasn't really taken by that as much, especially since people said the same about Apple TV's Foundation series. So I just enjoyed the movie as Dune and bore no comparisons. After watching part two however I see it; the world building, the politics, the epic grandeur of it all.

However, the first half of Dune Part Two is pretty grounded and calm, delving into the lives of the Fremen. It almost feels like two distinct movies, the first half intricately setting the stage for the climactic third act and reinforcing character connections established in Dune Part One. Unlike the Part One's focus on lore, this movie is more devotion-driven, also resembling a political narrative, especially knowing of the hidden puppeteers behind the empire. The result appears to be an intricate web of schemes involving the empire, the witch-advisor women(can't spell their names lol), and the Baron's family. Despite the emperor's pulling the strings, the Baron's family still felt like main antagonist to me.

The second half of the movie is where we see the epic scale of dune. The movies not quick paced but you couldn't tell, I was absolutely immersed in it.

I absolutely loved the kind "The mahdi is too humble to say he is the mahdi." Theatre burst out in laughter. It felt weird, I wasn't expecting any humour. It's funnier than I expected. More lively than the first Dune movie. I'd already seen the Usul-worm-riding scene from the Dune Part One reopening bonus content. I was still just as excited and it didn't spoil a thing.

The visual brilliance, as expected was stunning, elevating every aspect. The authenticity of the scenes made it feel as if characters were immersed in the environment, rather than merely placed against a green screen. I loved the portrayal of time passing through Paul's changing eyes; the longer he stays the bluer his eyes get. Despite how lively it is, the plot, while progressing at a measured pace, remains engaging, drawing attention away from its deliberate slowness. It has much more action, the battles were absolutely epic, I feel like they could have been longer but they still captivated me.

Jessica disappears for a while, but just when I thought that, she showed up. Other than Paul and Zendeya, the rest of the cast doesn't really get as much screen time as you'd think. I loved the baby/embryo/featus scenes. Batista with no mask in the desert while his whole team's suited up was badass. I love him in darker roles, although I think some moments felt overly animated. But it gave an effective contrast to Austin Butler though, I couldn't wait to see what his character was like. Very fierce, intimidating and psycho. The girl shivering with the plate in her hands before the gladiator games made me chuckle. Butler did also sound like the baron at times.

Dune: Part Two stands steady on its own, it felt complete compared to the more introductory feel of Part One. Despite this, I still felt like it lays groundwork for Dune: Part Three/Messiah, leaving a sense of setup. The movie, while feeling like a precursor, still manages to provide a more conclusive ending. I also think you should watch Part One first, if that has to be said; and the prospect of a back-to-back viewing sounds like a fun afternoon.

One thing I can complain about is Stilger. I have mixed feelings. In Part One, Javier was fierce and was my favorite character, in this movie though he's depicted as a religious fanatic for the most part. It was done well, but I still miss the Stilgar who walked up to Duke Leto Atreides with no disregard. This felt like a different person, still fierce, just different.

Loved Austin butler though, I wasn't sure what to expect as I tried my best to avoid trailers and teasers apart from the Dune part one bonus content. That short lady in charge of extracting 'the water of life' had some insane calves on her, I'm extremely jealous.

While I was initially not convinced about Timothée Chalamet as the lead, he truly owns the role in the sequel, displayed acting facets I'd not seen before from him. The movie essentially unfolds as Paul Atreides' coming-of-age story, with Zendaya delivering an amazing performance. The first act, focusing on their love story, adds depth to the events at the movie's end. Zendaya's portrayal transcends the typical love story, I hope her role extends into Dune: Messiah, and hopefully adds further complexity to her character.

We see Paul undergo some transformations. From being the son of royalty to experiencing love, the narrative takes a surprising turn when he assumes authority in the third act. Although I liked it, it felt a bit rushed. But, I found solace/logic with the "water of life" spiritual poison, where drinking it resulted in a profound shift in your personality. The contrast between the before and after versions of Paul, as well as Jessica, is striking so it kinda made sense to me.

I think watching this movie at home won't do it justice, it's clearly made for the big screens if you can. It's pretty epic and I think it'll remain memorable as one of 2024's best movies, despite only being February. I absolutely loved it.

I have to start by saying that I absolutely loved the first movie. I wasn't familiar with the story and I went with zero expectations, only to be completely stunned by the masterful artwork that was Dune Part 1.

The music, the sound, the visuals, the entire world and its atmosphere, the characters even the plot, I found everything beautifully crafted and a breath of fresh air for the Sci-Fi genre.

I am not familiar with the source material so this is considering only the movies and while I had a deep desire to love this second part specially considering the reviews it has been getting and how much I loved the first one, I couldn't help but feel a slight disappointment... Let's start with the positives - the cinematography is consistently out of this world, it is a visual wonder, a mix of practical effects with CGI that blends in perfectly. The intense and dramatic sound effects associated with a thrilling and daunting soundtrack delivers! And of course the acting is consistently good, this time around it was great to see Javier Barden's character being developed and bringing some great topics to the table.

What makes me wonder the most to be honest is how different both the first movie and the second are being reviewed by the general public.. For once its running time is considerable (almost 3 hours) and somehow it feels strangely rushed... It's a bit odd to explain but in other words, we get so many scenes that feel that don't contribute at all to the narrative and out of the blue we transition to a scene where the main character changes the demeanor entirely without much build up leading to it.. The movie spends so much time trying to connect Paul to the Fremens, yet it fails to explore his own inner motivations, the moment we see his character changing, it gives you the feeling that you missed something.

Paul's betrayal to Chani also feels a bit irrelevant since the chemistry built on the first movie seems to just dissipate... The relationship with his mother is also very odd and inconsistent, her character becomes dark fairly early in the movie, in one moment she is her beloved mother and without much shared screen time he then seems to almost despise her by the end of the film without the audience having a deeper understanding of their relationship dynamic.

The newly introduced villains are one dimensional and having Austin Butler's character seemed pointless... there was no goal for him, he gets killed off almost instantly alongside with the Baron who got so much build from the first movie... An A list of actors like Florence Pugh, Christopher Walken and Léa Seydoux, all of them could've been amazing characters but get zero chance of showing that.

An entire plot with Paul's sister goes out the drain as well... messing with time started to become promising but it leads nowhere... I mean I could go on, in short the movie had many plot gaps, didn't develop the characters properly, poorly introduced the newcomers and relied heavily on its outstanding cinematography and sound.

It's a shame because I can't tell you how excited I was to write a praising review, but this was my honest opinion which apparently doesn't seem to align with the majority.

A lot of scenes drag without much substance to it, the highlight of the film was Javier Barden's character and the messages behind the dangerous of the concept of a Messia.

I am of course hopeful for the third movie, maybe with my expectations now lowered it becomes a great experience all over again.

"Dune" has been successfully put to the big screen. Not only is this a good adaptation, it passes with flying colors.

The character arc of Paul Atreides is fascinating and complex. I love how they delved into his psyche and motivations so prevalently in this movie. He is reluctant to take up the Messianic mantle because he knows it's a lie. But things go according to his vision and he becomes a morally complex character. Religious fantacism takes hold of the fremen.

It is up for interpretation what kind of character Paul becomes. Is he a tyrant? Was it the only path? What does religion have to do with it? Paul takes hold of the Bene Gesserit lie by exploiting faith.

This leads to other questions. Can one truly trust the arm of flesh? The frailty of man? Leaders have come and gone throughout history bringing different ideals.

One's own morality comes into play. Agency is vital to the human experience. Man will always falter. This leads to questions of a higher power and His role. Is there a God above? What are the implications of that?

We don't get stories like this in Hollywood anymore. There is no happy ending in Dune, and one can only ponder the moral complexities of it. The book and movie have made me contemplate many things and I deeply appreciate stories like that.

Others have already applauded the effects, acting and script, so I won't go into that too much here. What I will say is it was the best looking movie I have ever seen. Everything looked lived in. The fight scenes were choreographed masterfully. Each actor gave outstanding performances. Hans Zimmer gives a mesmerizing soundtrack.

Frank Herbert's vision was honored masterfully. Well done Denis Villeneuve.

As with the first film, the production was beautiful. I loved the opening scenes with the Harkonnen soldiers. The arena fight between Austin Butler and the last Atreides Robert Yuan (actors names) was fantastic. The battles with the harvesters were phenomenal.

The script, however, left me a little bit disappointed. What about the Guild Navigators? And how were the worms used after they came through the pass in the mountains opened up by the atomics? There was only one sequence of the initial charge (marvelous sequence when the gunships entered) but then nothing. The Sardurkar were not given enough respect in this film. There was only one scene that showed them respect and that was when they rose up from the fallen sand and rock debris and stood their ground preparing for the oncoming onslaught instead of panicking. Other than that I felt the film should have spent more time on tactical combat scenes in what was supposed to be an epic battle at the end of the film, maybe trim time off of the other dragged out sequences in the film. The first movie did a better job with the Sardaukar, you actually feared them. The epic battle at the end of this movie was less than epic. And poor Bautista, they should not have made him act like such a wimp, should have had a more glorious fight even in retreat.

As much as I like Walken, I thought he was poorly cast to be Emperor. The 1984 film had a perfect actor for the personality. This is Villeneuve's fault, he picked him.

The script also fails to emphasize that Paul is the Kwisatz Haderach at the end of the movie. Paul's initial ability to vaguely see the future comes from the centuries of genetic tinkering of the women of the Ben Gesserat, but after he drinks the water of life and not only survives but develops the ability to see an individual's past, as evident by the scenes in the Fremen temple where he looks at individuals and describes their past, and more clearly sees optional future outcomes, and after he actually fulfills all of the prophecies of the Fremen, the story is true, he really is the Messiah of Arrakis, justifying the religion, and he really is the Kwisatz Haderach, a man with abilities that no other man has. But the film appears to gloss over this. Shame. He is not just some populist charismatic man blamed by the likes of Zendaya's character for (perceived) fooling anyone to follow him and falling for the appeal of power and giving up his principles, he is more than that.

My critique of the first film was not enough emotion, well part 2 does a better job, especially after Paul survives the water of life and becomes the anti-hero, all hell breaks loose. And Zendaya's character being a more independent women than the 1984 film was interesting, albeit the combat skills or luck were not realistic unless you buy that the Sardaukar were that inept. Part 1 was a better drama than part 2, but part 2 has some great action sequences, besides the disappointments I mentioned earlier. Not a perfect film for this Dune 1984 admirer.

Denis Villeneuve's second half of his adaptation of Frank Herbert's Dune fully embraces the spectacle inherent in the material while also digging into the core implications that Herbert was exploring around power, cults of personality, and leadership. He flips some things around (I'm pretty sure), but otherwise delivers a handsome, exciting, second half to what he had started. And then he highlights Chani way too much, changing her character so much that she sticks out like a sore thumb to curious purposes that do little more than distract from what's going on around her. Seriously, if the final twenty seconds of this film were chopped off and lost in a fire, I'd actually be a good bit more positive on the film.

Paul Atreides (Timothee Chalamet) and his mother the Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson) have joined the Fremen led by Stilgar (Javier Barden). Paul grows close to Chani (Zendaya) who helps teach him the ways of the desert as they go into hiding from the dominant Harkonnen led by the Baron (Stellan Skarsgard), his elder nephew Rabban (Dave Bautista) left as governor of the desert planet Arrakis while the Baron continues to groom his younger nephew Feyd (Austin Butler) towards leadership. Operating as an exposition dump for those who didn't remember the first film is Irulan (Florence Pugh), nominally taking up her chronicling duties from the book (her entries marking the start of every chapter), while her father, the Emperor Shaddam IV (Christopher Walken), quietly ruminates on the implications of his plan to eradicate the Atreides perhaps failing.

This is one of those stories that I know so well, that I kind of assume that everyone knows. And yet, Dune, for all it's popularity among scifi nerds, isn't the grand cultural touchpoint it's sometimes made out to be. Its influences are strong and wide, but the actual story knowledge isn't.

Anyway, now's the time to talk about some creative choices. The first that screams out to me is how much more stylized visually the film is. The film opens with a scene of Harkonnen troops attacking the Fremen in the desert, and Villeneuve uses a partial eclipse as an excuse to bathe the entire scene in a deep orange. It's really nice to look at. I've been curious about the black and white segments in the trailers since I've seen them, and the explanation is that Geidi Prime has a black sun making it so that outside just looks like that. Knowing more from the books, I'd say that the whole Harkonnen look is something I'd attribute more to the Bene Tlielax, but it's at least interesting to see.

There's a heavy emphasis on the Bene Gesserit and their breeding program in here, which I appreciate. I think that most heavily gets highlighted in the inclusion of Lady Margot Fenring (Lea Seydoux), a Bene Gesserit sent to Geidi Prime to seduce Feyd, secure his bloodline, and learn how to manipulate him should certain probabilities arise. She is very briefly seen in a modified form in the Sci-Fi Channel series, but otherwise she's never made an appearance in an adaptation. Although, unless Villeneuve is planning on using material from the sequel novels written by Brian Herbert (please no), Lady Fenring shouldn't be making any more appearances, making this feel like something of a dead end that still manages to provide some nice detail in terms of worldbuilding.

And that leads me to the editing. I like how much detail gets brought in to help fill out the world (universe) of Dune, but there are some places where the film feels too fast. Take, for instance, the jump from Paul and Chani sitting on a dune watching a wormrider in the distance, Chani explaining to Paul that he'll never become a rider because he's not really Fremen. Cut ahead to about fifteen minutes later in screentime, there's been no mention of Paul training or anything, and now it's time for Paul to ride his first worm. Time has obviously passed, and this feels like the instance of a cut scene that was deemed unnecessary. However, considering how much time gets dedicated to Fenring's seduction of Feyd, it makes you wonder if the priorities were in total alignment when cutting the film down to its current length.

So, Paul stays in the northern parts of Arrakis to lead the small revolt of the Fedaykin fighters against the Harkonnen while Jessica, pregnant and having become the Fremen's Reverend Mother through the changing of the Water of Life from poison into a harmless drink (no orgy in this mostly sexless adaptation), a process that awakens her unborn daughter, Alia, into consciousness. Gonna be honest, Jessica talking to Alia outloud is great. It's just the right kind of funny in this universe. Anyway, Jessica becomes a fanatic in the pursuit of Paul's legend as the Mahdi, the Lisan al-Gaib, the Voice from the Outer World, while Paul resists it. If I remember correctly, this is something of a complete reversal where Paul easily fell into the legend to help him fight while Jessica saw it as something of a survival mechanism, an unfortunate path she had to take to stay alive. I don't mind this change because Furgeson as a madwoman is great to watch.

Things escalate. The Emperor must come to Arrakis. There is a showdown, and that showdown is great. It reminded me of the epic ending to James Cameron's Avatar, a movie I have no great love for but which, I cannot deny, has a freaking awesome final act action sequence. Atomics, worms, giant spaceships, it all comes together in an action and special effects extravaganza that Villeneuve manages with aplomb. It's great fun.

Now, Chani. Chani is given extra prominence, and I really don't like how they did it. She is one of the Fremen who does not believe in the Lisan al-Gaib, and she sticks to that belief through everything she witnesses. As Paul is presenting all of the signs, as Chani herself is becoming part of the prophecy that she rejects through literal actions, she not only resists, but she fights back against it. It's so out of place, and it goes through to the end of the film. Sure, Herbert having Chani blithely accept that the love of her life is going to marry an imperial princess for power was always a bit thin, but turning the ending of the film into watching her pouting is just wrong.

The story of Dune is Paul going from boy to man to leader to godhead. It's not Chani being mad that Paul is going from boy to man to leader to godhead. Ending on her was a mistake.

Anyway, it's a spectacle. I think it gets the heart of Herbert's message right. It mixes things up to some degree and to not entirely successful effect. As an adaptation of Dune, I think the Sci-Fi miniseries is probably the best, but as a filmed experience, this is the more exciting and complete of the three attempts.

I just watched this in IMAX and it was one of the greatest movie experiences I have ever had. Everything from part one was done even better in part two and the story was much more interesting. The outfits were so unique and really well made. Whenever I thought it was starting to move a little slow something insane happens and I'm instantly drawn back into the world of dune that Denis has remade and expanded on so much. All the shots of the different worlds were just breathtaking. The last hour of the movie is by far some of the best made cinema in awhile and the action was so good. The last fight was awesome as well. "You fought well Atreides."

Lawrence of Arabia without the depth.

The pacing was the problem.

It was far too slow for the first 3/4 then rushed at the end.

It meandered with little sense of what the point was at times.

Chalamet just became a megalomaniac quite abruptly with very little development.

And there was no surprise that he was going to become a messiah.

His big challenge of riding a sand worm - "the biggest ever seen" (of course) - was predictably successful

Why was Jessica chosen to be the Fremen mother superior when outsiders were so distrusted?

Too little explanation, even though there was plenty of time to do so.

Baron Harkonnen became quite ineffectual.

The Emperor seemed a quite feeble old man.

Where did his power come from?

His fighters seemed quite average.

He landed on the Arakkis and was defeated easily.

I enjoyed Part 1 more because the characters were fresh and were more engaging.

In Part 2 they seemed a little empty and caricatured. Part 2 seemed more of a grind.

But, even so, I did enjoy it and will probably enjoy it more on 2nd watching.

Zendaya was excellent.

So was Ferguson

The exploration of religion, fanaticism, freedom fighting vs terrorism, was interesting and unusual for a sci-fi movie. It does stand head and shoulders above most blockbusters.

Of course, the visuals were stunning, as was the teeth-rattling sound.

Although I admire the Director's more measured approach, i.e. Not just churning out a sequel, I'm not sure I'm excited enough for a part 3.

Dune 2 is a big screen action/adventure spectacle the likes of which hasn't been seen since, well, maybe the first Dune in 2021. But when it comes to paying off what the original effort set up so perfectly, this sophomore sequel doesn't quite hit it out of the park.

For a very basic overview, Dune 2 picks up with Paul (Timothee Chalamet) and mother Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson) living amongst the Fremen after House Atreides being all but wiped out in the House Harkonnen collaboration with the Emperor's army to re-take Arrakis. Though Jessica and Stilgar (Javier Bardem) continue to tout Paul as the mythical prophesized messiah per the Bene Gesserit religious sect, Paul isn't yet convinced-nor are other Fremen like Chani (Zendaya). Will Paul accept the mantle and risk all-out religious war-or choose to remain embedded "locally" with the Fremen? Meanwhile, Baron Harkonnen (Stellan Skarsgard) is struggling to control spice production on Arrakis, so unhinged nephew Feyd-Rautha (Austin Butler) is called in for assistance. Finally, the Emperor (Christopher Walken) and Princess Irulan (Florence Pugh) scheme to keep themselves in power over all of the machinations.

There is absolutely no doubt that Dune 2 is cinema spectacle of the highest order. Director Denis Villeneuve composes a film that should be seen in the biggest format possible (to truly appreciate the scale) and within the best sound structure (Dolby Atmos for me and it was theater-rumbling!). There is never a dull moment from beginning to end-always something interesting to look at or immerse yourself in on screen.

Here's the issue with Dune 2: the first film was one of the best world-building setups I've ever seen in a flick. It expertly dropped viewers into the planetary conflict, gradually built up the key characters, and imbued it all with a sense of great mystery and intrigue. While this sequel technically pays off all those setups, it doesn't always do so in the most satisfying or understandable of ways. I won't go into every nook and cranny here, but a few examples:

-Paul resists his messianic calling the entire film-until the end when he just "gives in"?

-The fetus within Jessica is talking to her and will someday grow up to be Anya Taylor-Joy's brief cameo character?

-Even after Paul accepts his mantle-the Houses won't acknowledge him?

-The bombshell of Paul's more-diverse-than-we-realized bloodline came off as anticlimactic, especially considering how it immediately becomes the driving force of the film's endgame.

I know that there is an answer to every question posed above-but none of it felt all that satisfactory or revelatory to me. Part of the problem could be that I was expecting more of a definitive ending and received a "setting up a franchise" denouement instead. A particularly telling observation was how my favorite character in the entire movie was Butler's Feyd-Rautha. Why? Because-like in Dune 1-it was something completely different/new and shrouded in mystery that Villeneuve was able to unwind.

So, in my final reckoning of Dune 2, the visual spectacle and star-studded cast do most of the heavy-lifting. If you don't see this one from a theater seat at least once, you are doing yourself a disservice. But if you are looking for a plot-tight, perfectly character-fulfilling narrative, you may walk away a little disappointed (at least compared to the first Villeneuve Dune).

I didnt read the book. I dont care about the book. This is a MOVIE, so forget about comparing the book to the movie and vice versa. Please!

I didnt like Part One. It bored the heck out of me. It honestly did. I DO LIKE Part Two much better though, it's vibe is completely different (much more bleak and exciting). But it also has got it's flaws and BEWARE, you wont leave the cinema feeling all cheery and revived, because this sequel is quite a heavy mother...

The bad: there is a limit to how long I can stand these contineous Hans Zimmer droning booming sounds. They just do not stop. There needs to be some BALANCE in the use of these bombastic sounds. A pause, a silence now and then only enhances the effect. Less is more...

More bad: this movie's storyline is all over the place. It feels rushed at moments, confusing at other moments, some characters randomly appear and disappear. Everybody is (rightfully) complaining about this sequel being low on storyline.

The good: Part Two has got a mean, vicious bleak spirit, with some really creapy bad guys. They really succeeded in making me being appalled by some of these mean characters. Great!

More good: the action is quite dark and intrusive and mesmirising to watch. Almost hypnotizing action visuals.

The really good stuff: the actors are simply sublime. They just dont come any better, although I personally do NOT like that they choose Timothee Chalamet for this character. I think he is just not suited for this role. But that is just my personal opinion...

Visually it is terrific (as always with director Denis Villeneuve). Storywise it is kinda disappointing. Mixed bag. Certainly NOT worthy of 9 stars, that's simply ridiculous, but still worth a really enjoyable (heavy mother of a) watch nonetheless.

Thank you for reading my 2200 th review on Imdb!

I just watched the pre-premiere of part two of Dune. It was a very good adaption of the books but not what totally what I expected. At the end the movie strayed away from the book which made me a bit sad to be honest. Especially the part (which is very important in the book-storyline) is the fact that the sister of Paul wasn't born yet when the film came to it's conclusion. Where in the book his little sister kills the Baron in the film Paul takes the honor of doing so. Also the fact that Chani is not supporting Paul for taking the hand of the Emperor's daughter, didn't have a child with him yet and actually goes her own way makes it hard to get a good start for the inevitable third movie that has to come. As a movie it was a great experience though. The action is great and the storytelling just as well. I personally wished that they sticked to the book till the end. Part one definitely did follow the book... part two also till the midst of the film. Still I strongly recommend to watch it... it is a must-see movie and ranks as one of my alltime favorites already.

Paul Atreides and his mother are now living with the Fremen following the Harkkonen bid to wipe out clan Atreides. Paul comes to prominence because it seems he may fulfil a prophecy, which may enable him to obtain revenge against the Harkkonens and also the Emperor, who facilitated their action in the first place. But Paul has visions of a war he wants to avoid, and the Bene Gesserit sisterhood have plans of their own.

Part Two picks up where the first film left off, and brings the story to a conclusion of sorts (author Frank Herbert wrote five sequels). I was a huge science fiction reader when the original novel was published, but I had a great deal of trouble with it. Its texture and density was a bit too much for me in my mid-teens, and previous film versions didn't help much. I was pleased with Villeneuve's film from 2021, because I could finally follow the story without confusion.

Part Two - not so much. The narrative is fairly straightforward, but it often felt as if exposition had been omitted. For instance, Lea Seydoux appears in some tight closeups and meaningful dialogue: she plays Lady Margot Fenring. Who? This is presented as a character of significance, a name actress with image and dialogue delivered using film grammar which shouts Significant! Yet we don't know who she is or why she matters, and we never hear from her again.

The performances are good, the visuals are great, but again the story proves difficult to convey without confusion. It's a good film, but it's something of a disappointment compared to its predecessor,

I tried not to feel conditioned by the hype around this movie, but I was quite dissapointed after watching it.

After a superb part one, which was a magical exhibition of cinema and an aesthetic pleasure, this second part is quite pretentious. Looks like the style exercise of an artist in love with himself, and seems that the story is a secondary factor here.

It is like, "ok, did you like the scenes of the thumper calling the sandworm?, here you have like twenty scenes of a thumper calling sandworms, and even a scene with twenty thumpers calling sandworms at the same time; did you like the beautiful faces of Zendaya and Rebecca Ferguson in the desert, with great Hans Zimmer music?, ok, here you have fifty seven shots of the beautiful faces in dramatic moments of all the extremely pretty actresses we have been able to recruit for this". The problem is that quantity does not compensate for the loss of the surprise effect.

In fact, the story is just an excuse for an interminable exhibition of close-ups of the incredibly beautiful faces of the female cast, no less beautiful desert sceneries, and an interminable succession of sand worm ridings.

Flat and hollow aesthetics, with a really poor storytelling. The story is confusing, with a first act focused in the Fremen, but with no real advance of the story, just Fremen in the desert, Fremen worshiping the mesiah, Fremen riding worms, worshiping again, Chani frowning at the inmensity of the desert with deep music, and so on (actually, Chani spent all movie frowning). Actually, the first act was terribly boring.

Then, the abuse of ellipsis makes the story rush forward, to the point of losing sense sometimes. It is really difficult to follow it without any previous knowledge of what happened in the original novel.

This rush lead to weird situations, as when suddenly Chani shows up out from nowhere in a ornithopter, and you ask yourself why and how she ended flying that thing.

The rush to close the story causes the last act to be resolved hastily and sloppily. The expected final battle is resolved very quick and lacking epic and glory. The supposedly powerful and fearsome Sardaukar appears in the last battle as a few random guys without any combat abilities. The formerly powerful emperor and Harkonnen, are now weak and do not stand a chance against the new dark mesiah and their fundamentalist troops.

Overall, the movie lost all the magic and mistery of the first part, and it is just an exhibition of style from a director that seems to be more in love with himself than with the story he is telling.

About acting, all the cast are doing a great job. Special mention to the superb Javier Bardem, who, together with Zendaya, support all the movie on their shoulders. All the Harkonnen are doing a great job and are the most interesting characters, both in acting and aesthetically. To me, Paul Atreides is the worst part, plain and lacking substance and the you could expect from the leader of a holy war against a galactic empire.

In summary, a pretentious sequel larguely inferior to the first part in all aspects.

I'm going to write this as a review for both Dune movies, so I'll include my thoughts about Dune part one throughout. For me, the most difficult part about rating these movies is trying to judge them as they stand on their own without comparing them to the original book.

As movies, I think both are great: the cinematography is amazing, the sound design is good, the acting is good, I liked the visual style and how they interpreted the various technologies of the world of Dune. The soundtrack is good, it can be a little overbearing at times but the music in part two felt like an improvement on this from part one. One of the biggest complaints people had with both movies is the pacing, saying that the first movie was dragging and the second was rushing. I agree with the sentiments about the latter, but personally I enjoyed the slower pacing of the first Dune movie. The second movie definitely moves quickly through its first half, then it slows down a lot in the second half before rushing to its conclusion.

The casting is good for the most part, I personally disagree with casting Rebecca Ferguson but I'll get into that more later. In the first movie I wasn't especially impressed with Timothée Chalamet as Paul but I think he does better in the role in the second part. Jason Momoa was a perfect pick for Duncan Idaho and Oscar Isaac did a great job as Duke Leto. Stellan Skarsgard was a good choice for Baron Harkonnen but I think he could have been written better. I was really looking forward to seeing Christopher Walken as the Emperor Shaddam but unfortunately he felt pretty lifeless and didn't bring very much energy to the scenes he was in.

Overall, as they stand on their own, the Dune movies are great films. I don't know if I'd call them the defining sci-fi movies of the 21st century like other people are saying, but they're still very good, definitely rewatchable, and I would recommend them.

Now, moving on to comparing them to the books, because once you start doing that you get to the more disappointing side of these movies. One of the biggest issues with both movies, especially the second, is that they almost completely leave out the ecological message of the book. This is a book that has been used as a textbook in environmental science classes, but I guess the filmmakers decided that message wasn't important enough. The Fremen are shown to be working towards terraforming Dune into a green world, slowly but surely making wind traps and planting grasses to fix the dunes in place. It's a goal that they are working towards with total commitment even though they know that it won't be realized for several generations. That's a powerful message that I think a lot more people need to hear nowadays, especially in reference to the issue of climate change. The movie barely mentions this goal at all, which I think is a disservice to the original story, and it diminishes the Fremen as characters.

I think the fundamental issue that these movies have with their adaptations is an understandable one, but that it could've been solved in a better way. The main issue with adapting the book is that the characters are very difficult to relate to: most of them are superhumans who have insane abilities. For the movies, a lot of the main characters are altered to make them more relatable to the audience, which is an understandable change. For some characters, this greatly improves them from the book, such as Duncan Idaho and Duke Leto. For others, like Chani and Jessica, it reduces the strength of their characters, which I'll explain more later.

Additionally, the book has a lot of complex concepts and story plots that it never stops to fully explain to the reader, you're just supposed to pick it up as you go along and reread it to understand, making it a little obtuse. Dune is very dialogue-heavy, with a lot of the action happening in the background or only described briefly. To remedy this, the movies remove some of the more complex topics and add more action scenes, which are exciting and well choreographed, but in the second movie they start feeling repetitive and redundant, and they overpower the more intricate plot points.

While the first movie cleverly managed to insert a lot of exposition without feeling like it was constantly lore dumping, part two feels like it's more afraid to explain things than the first, possibly because of complaints that "nothing happened" in the first movie. The result of this is that the second movie is much more action-heavy, but it still wants to include the complex topics from the book, so what we get is a bunch of action sequences with scenes of political complexities strung in between them, but without the full explanations necessary to clarify them. It's easy to understand why people who haven't read the books would feel confused by this, the movie barely takes the time to explain what's happening before it's moving on to the next scene of Fremen blowing up spice haulers.

Getting into direct comparisons to the book now, and starting with the first movie: my two biggest issues with the first movie was how they changed Jessica and how they dumbed down the mentats. Starting with mentats, they are a hugely important part of all of the Dune books; Thufir Hawat is essentially a main character in the first book, and Peter de Vries is a terrifying mastermind behind the Harkonnen plans. Part of what triggers Paul's first vision of the coming Jihad in his name is that his mother tells him he was trained as a mentat from birth without his knowledge. In the movie, the word mentat is never said once; Paul's mentat training isn't brought up; Thufir Hawat is just a guy who rolls his eyes back in his head, says something smart and then disappears at the halfway mark; and Peter de Vries dies of poisoning. How disappointing.

But what I think is the worse change that they made from the book is how they changed Jessica's character. While the Dune books get much more feminist as they go on, the first book has very few female characters. However, Jessica makes for a very strong main character: she has complete control over her mind and body, and through her Bene Gesserit training she has almost superhuman strength, speed, and can control others with the Voice. Her internal monologue also shows that she's almost always two steps ahead of everyone except Paul. In the movies, Jessica feels much weaker. In the first movie she's almost always crying or on the verge of tears, which makes it a lot believable when she starts killing Harkonnens with her bear hands, and it makes the scene in the tent when Paul gets his vision (the only part of the book where Jessica openly grieves) much less powerful.

Moving on to the second movie is where the changes get more disappointing. The movie begins with Paul, Jessica and the Fremen fighting the Harkonnens in some battle between the fight with Jamis and them getting to Sietch Tabr, which wasn't in the book and felt like it was added for the sake of starting with an action sequence. After the fight, Jessica throws up involuntarily --- again, as a Bene Gesserit she should have total control over her body and it doesn't make sense for her to do that, even though she's pregnant.

Speaking of Jessica's child, Alia isn't really a character in this, at least not like she was in the book. I can understand this, I had no idea how they were going to handle having a toddler who walks and talks like an adult and kills a man, and they handled it by having Jessica not give birth during the movie. They also don't really explain how Alia is pre-born, which is a piece of information that people who didn't read the book could probably use.

Once Paul and Jessica get to Sietch Tabr, things feel a lot different. The book describes the interiors of the Sietch as being covered with drapery, rugs, and cushions. There are classrooms, plastic factories, and workshops. The movie doesn't show this at all: the Sietch interior is all smooth, carved stone rather than natural rock walls, there's no textiles to be seen, and essentially only the water reservoir is shown. In general, the depiction of the Fremen in the movie is much worse than the book. The Fremen are a very tight-knit community where people understand each other's needs so well that they don't even need to communicate them out loud. When Jessica feels like she needs a coffee, a Fremen with coffee simply appears without her giving an order. In the movie the Fremen are three things: good at stabbing people, fanatic believers in Paul, or people who hate the Mahdi prophecy and don't believe in Paul. In the book, this dissenting faction against Paul isn't really present, and Chani definitely isn't part of it. I can understand that the filmmakers probably added it to help drive home the anti-hero worship message which a lot of people missed from the book, but it could have been executed better.

I also disliked how they changed Chani. In the books she very easily falls for Paul and gives him unwavering support, and I think it's fine that they wanted to make that more nuanced for the movies, but I don't like the way they did it. The movie wants us to think that they love each other even though it constantly shows Chani ranting against the prophecy and disagreeing with Paul's actions. In the end, she leaves Paul after he agrees to marry the Emperor's daughter Irulan (even though in the book he makes it clear that he is only marrying her for politics, refuses to even touch her, and has three children with Chani instead). This ending will definitely complicate things if they do go through with adapting Dune Messiah to complete the film trilogy.

I'm running out of room to write, and most people probably won't read this anyway because of the length, so I'll just say again that I enjoyed the movies and think they're good, but some of the changes they made, especially in part two, were disappointing and could have been executed better.

Dune part 1 was okay. Dune part 2 is better, but ultimately far more shallow. There's a lot more stuff that happens in part 2, but the core of the Dune story is lost.

I liked the film. The film looks great. The CGI is great. It's paced well, and it's an enjoyable ride. The actors all do a good job. Big scenes, neat visuals and so on. It has an "epic" feel, but it's only skin-deep.

There's barely any depth to the story you're seeing. Things/events obviously happen, but it's like it's a summary of a story rather than the story itself. There's zero tension or danger in the story - there are no stakes, no danger, no victory. The characters just do things but never seem to actually experience anything. There is no hardship, no loss, no vistory.

There are no thrills, because there is no danger. There are no stakes because Paul (and the Fremen) never lose. There is no victory because the audience never feels like the good guys might lose. There is absolutely nothing thought-provoking in the slightest. There are no philosophical ideas (unlike the source novel).

One review claims the film is "thought-provoking". Anyone who finds this film thought-provoking is literally braindead, and has never experienced actual thoughts. The same review claimed it was "THRILLING", using a scene where Dave Bautista escapes via a helicopter. I can tell you honestly that there were no thrills in that scene.

Paul joins the Fremen, and then instantly becomes a military leader. Even his trial of living in the desert is skipped. He never experiences any trials or danger. Events just happen with no build-up. There is no emotional connection to anything happening.

Unfortunately, it's ultimately all spectacle with no heart. The story is epic, the vistas epic, the everything is epic, except the story.

This movie, about Paul Atreides who unites with Chani and the Fremen while seeking revenge against the conspirators who destroyed his family, is a masterpiece!

Just what I expected; definitely better on a rewatch! I loved it after my first-time watch, but now I love it even more. Now I am obsessed with it and cannot wait for the next sequel. During my first-time watch, there were several elements that slightly detracted my experience, like the time jumps, small and confusing but important details, pacing, and the deal with antagonists. There are still a few minor issues that I still think could have been done better, but now that I am already aware of them, I really do not care. Only the positive elements are visible to me because the original issues I had with it make much more sense now and feel just right.

I love the world introductions in Dune (2021), when we see everything for the first time. You just forget your own reality while being soaked into its fictional world. Once you have a good enough understanding and overview of the story and characters, the show goes on, especially in Dune: Part Two. The first movie is like a cold and dark introduction, but the second movie is more of a powerful and dangerous soul. The line by the father, Duke Leto Atreides, of the protagonist, Paul Atreides, "A great man doesn't seek to lead; he is called to it." is the perfect slogan for Dune: Part Two, and Dune: Part Two masterfully translates it into drama, action, and adventure. During my previous watch, I looked at the movie as more like the good versus the evil, but now my only focus is on Paul. Everything is about him himself. He is the one who moves the people. He is the one who makes a change for the world. My focus was too much on the antagonists during my first-time watch because I was disappointed with how easily they were defeated after a huge build-up, but now I see that part as a strengthening element to the depiction of Paul as Lisan al Gaib. The weaknesses of the antagonists make Paul so much more powerful, and I love it!

In terms of the technical aspects, they are probably the best ones I have ever experienced. They are not perfect, but you cannot get much better quality in 2024. Dune: Part Two has everything; cinematography, sound, score, CGI, practical effects, locations, costumes, makeup, props. It is mind-blowing. It is probably the best movie theater experience I have ever had, especially because of its technical aspects, which does not only make it to a fantastic movie, but an actual unforgettable experience, and I am grateful for that. Long live the cinema!

This movie surpasses its predecessor. The intricate world, allows the story to truly flourish. Paul emerges as the central focus, a leader not by choice but by destiny. The movie masterfully translates this theme into a thrilling spectacle, complete with unparalleled technical achievements. It is not only a good versus evil story, but a character study of the power and purpose of Paul. The experience is unforgettable, a testament to the magic of cinema.

This movie is a visual masterpiece that will be studied for decades. The colors are vivid, the lighting is gorgeous and the cgi is mostly indistinguishable from reality.

That said, despite being almost 3 hours long, the story felt hugely condensed. It felt like each scene gives you the bare minimum to understand what's happening, but elaborates on nothing. It felt like it wants you to immerse yourself in a unique and complex world, but gives every setting only a few minutes of time before hopping straight to the next. For example, the training of Paul. We never see him learn how to ride the sandworm, so when he succeeds, it doesn't feel as triumphant as it would have otherwise. The Harkonnens are also much less intimidating than they were before. Most of their screentime is comprised of them trying and failing to farm spice on Arrakis, until they are defeated by Paul and the Fremen at the end without much difficulty. They should have put up more of a fight. Lastly, I know from sources that an ecological message the was very important in the book was emmited completely from the film. The Fremen speak of bringing green back to Arrakis, but that's all we ever see them do.

Part of it may be a limitation of the format. If one must adapt a book full of complex lore, than either a trilogy or even a serialization may be the better option as you get more time to explain everything. I know that a third film is coming but it's not based on the same book anymore, and while I haven't read any of the books, I don't believe I should. I believe that film should stand on its own two feet, and this one does. Its legs are long and slender, with just the bare minimum of muscle required to stand, but it stands nonethelss :)

First of all, too many changes from the book in my opinion. The characters felt a bit off. I loved much of the visuals in the film, I like the world they created, felt in line with the book and I liked the choices for the actors portraying Harkonnens especially, however, the emperor just bothered me, I thought it was such a horrible choice, just terrible, otherwise a decent cast overall that fits with the descriptions of the characters.

There were many scenes added that were not in the book and some characters were entirely removed. They were not necessarily bad if you didn't read the book, like the killing of the baron, it worked, but I couldn't help but think about that. Also the child he had with Chani is not mentioned. His little sister would have been a great, twisted character but that was removed too... small things here and there that just lowered my enjoyment of the film.

It is also crazy long. By the end of it I couldn't wait to leave the theatre.

In the end, I feel like it was great visually but I felt that it changed details that I thought needed not changing so that lowered my enjoyment of this film considerably. If I was to go back in time I'd probably watch it at home on my tv instead of the theatre. Worth watching but I think that all the praises it's getting are a bit exaggerated, but definitely better than the garbage Disney puts out, so maybe that's why people love it so much.

If this movie wasn't 3 hours long... if it were say, 2 hours, I'd probably give it a solid 8. A lot went into this film. And I could write a review full of things I liked. But given all the 10 of 10 ratings (making it possibly the most overrated Hollywood film this century) I just have to state the minuses.

Dune: part 2 was full of long dialogue heavy scenes and too many characters and too much "worship" of Timothée Chalamet's character Paul. We get it.. he's the "chosen one." It just came off as cliché. And Zendaya is cool, but she's not the caliber of actor that can hold a movie for 3 hours. She had RBF the entire movie.

Also the build up to the bad guys dying over the last two films was a big let down. The "uncle" character (Baron) was awful for 2 films and he gets killed in 2 seconds. Same with his "nephew" (Glossu). All this time spent with them and they just fall over and die. And Christopher Walken was terribly miscast in this as the emperor. Weak character.

And the sandworms. They were cool the first 5 times. But for the amount of screen time they get and they never change... it gets old after awhile.

It's a good film to revisit to fall asleep too. But it other than a cool soundtrack and some great cinematography and costume design, this film doesn't really do much. Dune has proven a very difficult story to capture on film and no one has done it right yet.

The series is not over. Part two leaves open a part three. The real problem is the length of time between the releases. I forgot most of the first feature. Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) lives among the locals as he learns to become one of them including the John Cleese silly walk one must do to walk across the worm-infested desert. Mom aka Lady Jessica Atreides (Rebecca Ferguson) becomes the great holy mother and is with child. We discover a twist in her genealogy when Paul has a vision. Worlds collide as Paul becomes smitten with Chani Spice (Zendaya). Chani is our skeptic. She believes that prophecy and the promise of a coming messiah are tools used to enslave people. Dave Bautista remains typecast as a brute. Christopher Walken is still alive but I suggest they film his parts first in the next feature. They could have cut 30 minutes from the feature if they eliminated all of Timothée Chalamet's slow swagger walks. It got silly after a while.

Guide: No swearing or nudity. Implied sex.

It is probably impossible to create a good Dune movie, as the book(s) are really complex in many ways. With that said, the first movie captured the essence of Dune as well as you could and kept true to the plot for the most part.

This second movie, however, kills some characters and dynamics. Why is Stilgar only a comedic relief? Why did they decide to leave Alia, one of the most important characters in the books, out of the movie? Why is the relationship between Chani and Paul so shallow? They even left out that they had a son that died. The ending scene is underwhelming and is not in line with Paul from the books.

If you're willing to ignore these issues, or you have never read the books at all, this is still a GREAT movie, but the authentic Dune experience still remains Frank Herbert's book.

The movie was descent scifi and a FAIRLY good second part to the series. The character build wasgood but not great. The dialog left something to be desired as it was at times confusing if you didn't know the story. The cinematography was excellent.

All that being said, I can't for the life of me understand why the writers and directors feel in today's world that they have to change the original story line. The modifications done actually did major changes to the story in a way that made it lose continuity and not make sense in parts. The leaving out of specific caracter interactions such Pauls sister killing the Baron and Paul's ability to use the 'voice' to say nothing of skiping the whole sonic weapon storyline was crazy. Chanti's lack of support for Paul's descision to marry Emperor's daughter was weird. Chani not having a son was also strange as it played a big part in Paul's descision making.

All in all the tone and storyline of the second part was as if this was a totally different movie and story from the first part.

I believe I've witnessed something magnificent, and truly, it shouldn't be watched outside of the IMAX format because regardless of what anyone says, this is a modern classic. I'm writing this review somewhat for myself because years later, when I read it again, I want to see how much I elevated this legend and how it managed to close so many things correctly despite its mini flaws.

For the past two days, the film hasn't left my mind, and the reason I give it a perfect 10 is this. Whenever I talk about the film, I get excited because I've seen a visual masterpiece. It has incredible cinematography, beyond amazing. Watching the Lisan al Gaib scene where the Fremen walk from a bird's eye view, the scene between Paul and Feyd at the end, the scene where the Fremen accept Paul, the Harkonnen attack in the opening sequence, and many others, you feel that there are very few scenes like these. Greig Fraser is a master at this. Besides that, Hans Zimmer's music, which doesn't mean much when listened to alone but reaches a tremendous dimension with the sound mixing, adds a whole new dimension to the film. It's truly wonderfully designed and fitted, Denis, you're amazing.

And the casting is phenomenal. Dave, Timothée, Florence, Zendaya, Rebecca, Javier, Josh, Austin, they're all fantastic. I won't describe each one separately, saying 'this scene was superb,' everyone fits their role so well and performs so excellently that the film becomes a recital; there isn't a single scene with amateurish or shallow acting. Besides acting, something that needs to be mentioned is the stunts. The fight choreography was quite good and clear, especially the scene between Feyd and Paul at the end, where the music stops and we watch pure fighting for a few minutes, it was wonderful.

Besides the cinematography, casting and harmony, the legendary use and synchronization of music, there are two more reasons why this film excels and why I rate it highly. Firstly, the film is superbly adapted, I won't touch upon this further. Secondly, it's a fantastic critique film.

The film critiques every mundane and inherent aspect of human nature. Whether it's the dynastic system, coercion around the secret gene preservation logic, the exploitation of religion, political chaos, inefficient use of resources, and many more points, it hits the bullseye so accurately that it's both overwhelming and not tiring while making you feel it, a tremendous achievement.

Now, onto the contentious topic of staying faithful to the books and the polemic of how similar it was... Despite everything, it's said that both Part 1 and Part 2 were quite faithful to the book, and I believe they were. Some details might have been skipped or not exactly replicated in the second film, but for such a meta and philosophical book series, this is extremely normal; if everything were portrayed exactly, it might have been incomprehensible. I won't comment on the film's dynasty and operation right now because as a sequel, it has to complete the script with good motivation and also convey the characters it portrays well; I'm very happy it achieved this.

The film had a fitting humor, some scenes were mildly funny and unintentionally successful, which was admirable. Also, I think it will sweep the awards at the Oscars next year; it could win for its amazing costumes, production design, adapted screenplay, and maybe even best picture.

It's the peak of cinema that I've ever seen; go to IMAX, you won't regret it. I didn't delve into the details because everyone should watch it for themselves and try to interpret it in their own way; it's that kind of film.

"May thy knife chip & shatter." March 2024.

I went into this with big hopes, I was waiting for my day off of work to specifically see this at the cinema on IMAX.

Dune 1 (for me) is within the top 4 greatest 'Sci-Fi' movies. I say 'Sci-Fi' because it was futuristic i.e 'with greater technology' which (for me) results in 'Sci-Fi'.

Dune 2 was immense as an IMAX experience (no doubt). The explosions were awesome etc, however, where Dune 2 disappointed me was: (1) the fight scenes (2) the bi-polar characters (specifically Bautista)

(1) the group fight scenes (army battles etc) and what I'll refer to as the 'choreography' was poor, and you could see the actors waiting to be struck and it looked fake and ruined the credibility.

(2) Bautista in Dune 1 was frightening and dark where in Dune 2 he was a blubbering idiot. Also, the role played by Austin was 'okay' but the fact he needed the shield to fight 3 crippled Atreidas was confusing to me cos if Austin's character is such a badass then...?

My understanding of what is a 'Sci-Fi' has been changed, and from now on not only does it need 'technology' but also a 'higher level' of intelligence rather than a marketed/portrayed high level of intelligence.

Also the element of comedy in Dune 2 (which I like but not in 'Sci-Fi's) made it into an 'Action/Adventure' and there were Indiana Jones vibes in part from the 'Yemen' (sorry, the 'Fremen'). Bardem was a few lines away from saying 'Indy'.

In a nutshell Dune 1 was a dark and relatable movie. Spice = Oil etc etc. It was magnificent, and if Dune 1 = Batman Begins then Dune 2 = Batman & Robin.

For me this is overrated. It is good but not very very good.

Zendaya was good.

Chalomet was good.

Bardem was good.

Ferguson was good.

I wanted more and started falling asleep once the fight choreography ruined the credibility of what I expected to be a top top movie.

Yes, the scenes in the desert and the black and white Harkonnen home planet are visually brilliant. You can't criticize the fantastic camera work. And Zendaya also does a very good job.

BUT: The story of the outcast prince, who rises like a phoenix from the ashes and becomes the new ruler in a very short time, could also come from a Stallone film from the 1980s. And I have little sympathy for a main character, who uses, or rather abuses, mythology and religion for his rise.

In contrast, we are presented with the clumsiest villains in film history. Ugly, infinitely evil, sexually perverted. Is that really serious? A good villain should have motivation that is understandable to the viewer.

The score is incredibly intrusive. Sometimes you sense a few seconds earlier that a roaring and pounding noise is about to flood the cinema. This is too much.

The film actually has an excellent cast. However, Christopher Walken seems like a foreign body and doesn't take place even when he fills the entire screen.

This could be so much better.

Quite literally a one of a kind movie, I came in expecting greatness and it still exceeded any and all of my preconceptions.

How Villeneuve manages to keep story, setting, sound and soul consistent throughout this otherworldly space opera is beyond me and I am simply happy we finally get to share in its greatness. Apart from the fact that towards the ending some of the scenes feelt a bit rushed (death of Rabban, the arrival and defeat of the emperor), there were no cracks in the impenetrable armour of Dune. I could keep going for 10000 words but simply believe me when I tell you you need to see this film.

2023 was widely seen as the year the blockbuster died (I think that's hyperbolic, but let's go with it). A year with more flops than successes, a lot of audiences seemed to finally reject the endless stream of sequels, requels, and adaptations we'd gotten so accustomed to. And then, you have Dune Part II.

If anything, this movie proves that it's not "adaptation" that's the problem. It's having a purpose to doing it. I can't think of a more relevant property (and one that deserves proper cinematic treatment) than Dune. To be clear, I haven't even read the books, only gleaming what I know about them from pop culture, but like all great adaptations, now I want to read the series.

Where do I even start with Dune Part II? It's a gorgeous spectacle with richly layered characters and amazing performances; chock full of thought provoking ideas. This is a movie that reminds you why film - I'm just calling it here - is the best medium for storytelling. It combines every other aspect of art into a singular product. Visually and sonically, Dune Part II is on another level. I was lucky enough to see this thing in IMAX and it was truly worth it. Some frames look like paintings and there are gorgeous images that I'm still ruminating on a day after. The entire sequence of Geidi Prime, with the monochrome lighting, was such a perfect examples of how you can use the genre of science fiction to do something truly astounding visually. Having also recently seen Madame Web, this movie really made me appreciate great sound design and engineering.

Another thing I have to highlight is the film's amazing editing. There's a lot of moving parts in this movie and a lot that apparently had to be cut. While it's not entirely perfect and some things are gleamed over (more on that later), I have to applaud the editors for making this unwieldy, massive story so digestible.

But, the thing that really sets Dune Part II apart (even from its predecessors) are the characters, themes, and performances. Every character here - for the most part - is better than in the original, the mark of a great sequel. If you felt the original film felt "cold" and lacking in humanity, this movie is the exact opposite (not to mention the seemingly thousands of extras - although I'm sure they're mostly CG at this point). There's so much humanity here; so many relationships and ideas about people explored and enriched.

Timothee Chalemet may have delivered his defining performance in this movie. His Paul Atreides perfectly conveys the complex and nuanced character he's supposed to be; a boy turned man who is torn between his sense of justice and kindess, and the reality of power. He really delivers a powerhouse of a performance here.

Zendaya is also absolutely awesome in this movie. I loved the ideas and perspectives her character represented and she's entirely believable, as is her relationship with Paul. She's the best example of a female action hero; tough and competent, but not devoid of emotion or longing. Javier Bardem's Stilgar was one character who also really surprised me; he represents the Fremen who genuinely and passionately believe in Paul, yet he's never presented a "stupid" person or naïve. He and Zendaya's characters are thankfully, super important to the narrative.

Then there's Austin Butler as Feyd Rautha. This is a performance akin to that of Colin Farrell as the Penguin; Butler completely disappears into the role and as murderous as he is, I wanted to see more of him. (Kudos to Villeneuve for having a character like this in a PG-13 film) I was also really impressed by Rebecca Ferguson as Paul's mother, Lady Jessica. Her character conflict in the first didn't really jive well with me, and I'm happy to say she's so much better in this one as a more sinister figure. Really, her decision to tie her political ambitions with her personal wishes reminded me of a less obviously evil Cersei Lannister. And, while his role isn't as big in this one, I can't get enough as Stellan Skarsgard as Vladimir Harkonnen. He's amazing and has so much screen presence.

Fundamentally, Dune Part II tackles difficult questions and provides nuanced answers. It's about power and the way it manifests, and to all those who say it's essentially a repackaged "white saviour" trope, I feel need to improve their media literacy. Did you watch the movie? I can't think of a film that interrogates and deconstructs this idea more than this one.

The movie isn't entirely perfect. I feel that especially towards the end, a lot of things were rushed through, but I understand that heading towards the end of a nearly 3 hour movie, it's hard to justify MORE content. Overall though, believe the hype. Everything about this movie is tip top: the visuals, the costumes (my God, the costumes), the editing, the sound, the acting, the writing, the choreography (I didn't even mention the myriad of amazing set pieces)...yeah, this is blockbuster filmmaking at its finest. Denis Villeneuve is the real Lisan-al Ghaib at this point.

I loved the first movie. What happened with the second? For those who read the books.

First, what happened to the Space Guild Navigators? One of the main plots is that the Space Guild Navigators need spice to fold space and allow travel between the systems. No where to be found in this movie. So, for those who didn't read the books. Spice comes across as a drug used like cocaine in the movie. You have no sense of urgency because if the "Spice must flow" is stopped. It's the end of the empire.

Second, what a waste of of Christopher Walken. He comes across as the enfeebled emperor of the houses. The urgency for the emperor going to Dune is because he doesn't want Paul to tell the other houses about his betrayal? WHAT? I guess since you didn't bring in the Space Guild Navigators you had to invent another reason? Did Christopher's contract stipulate that he only wears robes or did they run out of money for his costumes? At the end of movie he looks like a homeless person walked on set. What was also missing was the pressure by the Witches and the Space Guild on the emperor to continue with spice production. Christopher was less menacing and more like 'Grandpa' needs to go to the memory care facility.

Third, I knew the movie was in trouble when I looked at my watch and realized "There's only nine minutes left in this move, how are they going to end it?". I felt the movie was rushed to reach a conclusion and the ending battle was chaotic and short. Chaotic in not a good way. There is a whole scene about 'the atomics' that made me question on why is it in the movie? We are told about the 'atomics', but there is no follow-up to the ending battle. The fierce emperor warriors come across as incompetent wimps. The ending seemed way to rushed. It's less about a powerful emperor and more like 'how did none of the other houses not take him out?'.

There are other problems that are pretty minor, like nothing is mentioned at all about the other systems. Like the Mentat's or the planet of machines. Too much time spent on 'Fade' killing people in an Arena, but failing to mention who these characters are. If you hadn't seen the first film, there deaths make no sense. Robands death seemed like an after thought. Like we need to get rid of this character, but the movie is going on too long. But, my primary complaint is the lack of 'Space Guild Navigators" and why Spice is so important to these people. There seems to be no urgency by any of the characters to make sure "The Spice Must Flow". Disappointed.

I liked the overall pacing of things much better in the first part. I can compare pretty well because I watched the first part night before the second part. First half is filled with dialogue, then second half is very rushed. Ironically, I think this movie works much better on small screen than on IMAX, where I saw this. Just because there is so much dialogue and actually not that much of visually impressive scenes which would work better on IMAX.

Feels like they used the time in less important places. Sardukan are suddenly poor cannon fodder instead of empires finest fighters. Paul and his savvy mates taking suddenly harvesters with gadgets they just suddenly happen to have. Nothing is explained via moving pictures. Not anything like how they organize the strikes against Harkonen or how they happen to have weapons of different variety and so on. Things just happen. Suddenly just because it's conventional Paul walks to different places without virtually any kind of resistance or drama just so that he can convey some lines which should be meaningful for the viewer. As it was in the first part, they don't really show the view of Harkonens. I liked the dynamic between the Harkonen baron and Rabban in the first movie, even though that they did gave very little of time for that side of the story in the first part, but they give even less time in this movie.

I expected at least something to really stand out in a production of this scale but nothing really stands out. Not writing, not actor performances, not music, nothing. The movie is kind of nice to see how things developed from the first part but that's pretty much it. That's why for me this movie is 6/10.

I still remember where I was when the first Dune movie was announced. Now, after all these years, I'm even more excited for what's to come. Before watching the movie, I read many praising articles and reviews, but none of them could prepare me for the reality of it. Dune Part Two delivers exactly what it promises - a bold adaptation of one of the greatest novels ever written. It's a tragic story of extreme superstitions that can cause even the most pure-hearted leaders to descend into chaos. The film starts with an incredible sequence showcasing the astonishing use of technology by the Harkonnens and the Fremen's insane harmonization with their planet. The Fremen take down their opponents swiftly and unnoticed, leaving a lasting impact on the viewer. The investment into the rest of the film only increases from that moment on. Denis Villeneuve has done it again and this time, he has hit a home run. Collaborating with one of the greatest cinematographers of our generation, Greig Fraser, Denis has produced a monumental piece of cinema. It not only surpasses the previous installment in every aspect but also reinvents science fiction itself. With its skillful use of practical sets, lighting, and digitized effects, this modern cinema masterpiece serves as a definitive masterclass for anyone aspiring to be a great filmmaker. Although the visual and audio effects in the movie are impressive, they do not distract from its main focus, which is the storytelling. The film follows a love story that defies all odds, as Paul assumes the role of the Messiah, Chani struggles to keep her mind clear of myths and falls in love with someone who is lost not only in the desert but in his heart as well. In the first act, Paul's character undergoes significant changes. He tries to distance himself from his mother's actions by joining the Fremen's cause to liberate their planet from tyranny. However, he remains unaware that Jessica's plan is already in progress. Despite this, the first act remains a charming distraction from these developments. The empire is in a state of despair as the Fremen successfully destroy the Harkonnen spice reserves one by one. This has pushed the Bene Gesserit to their limits, and as a result, the Baron has deployed his most valuable weapon, Feyd Rautha. The second act of the story mainly focuses on how to introduce a villain and make him memorable. And to top it all off, Denis created perhaps the greatest third act in existence. In the end, Paul finally realizes what he has to do. He takes the Water of Life and opens his mind to such an extent that he becomes aware of the destruction he is about to cause, but proceeds anyway. By doing so, he loses his one true love, yet he stands his ground in an incredible hand-to-hand combat and eventually to a holy war with him as an Emperor. Once again, Hans Zimmer's astonishing otherworldly soundtrack elevates this cinematic experience to uncharted hype territories. I highly recommend watching this film in 70mm IMAX print, if possible.

Let's all hope that Dune Messiah will become a reality.

Denis yet again understands cinema and understands the source material. His take on the story here elevates the source material in a way that can live alongside the book.

Denis intentionally chooses what to focus the story on: Paul internal battle. A forced prophecy. A devotion to someone in the face of duty.

The movie is clearly a spectacle and should be watched just on that. But the movie also is very upfront about its themes. More so than the book. And the appreciation to Denis on knowing what to change in the story to help elevate those themes.

I read the book. And I have no qualms with the changes his made because it was all for the story.

I applaud Denis.

There's no question that this film has stunning special effects, excellent production values and some decent performances (Javier Bardem's crusty but devout Stilgar springs to mind). But the movie is so long! (nearly 3 hours). Whereas I admired the first film for its ability to describe the world of Dune with good economy, this film seemed overstuffed with events that were hard to understand if you weren't overly familiar with the book(s). In addition, to realize that all the events (Jessica influencing the Fremen, Paul learning the Fremen ways, sabatoging the Harkonnen's spiceworks, Paul becomes a Messianic figure, etc etc etc) all took place in less than nine months?! (How do we know? Jessica is pregnant at the beginning AND the end of the film). But if you want a film full of spectacle, this one definitely has that and, credit due, some of the scenes are breathtaking.

For a movie that is dangerously close to 3 hours, I am impressed by how quickly it went by. The plot was consistently moving ahead but laced with lovely moments of quiet and stillness. It was visually a masterpiece! Beautiful scenery, detailed costumes, grand scale wide shots and tons of tiny details. In my opinion, the acting and casting were spot on all around. I liked the scenes from the emperor/princess. It was a great way to show those parts of the book.

The reason for the missing star (and the spoiler part of my review) is that very jarring, confusing editing choice early on where Paul is sent off on a test mission, but then for some reason Chani is with him all the sudden, and then people ate around. The plot kept going, but the trial never ended?! I thought I fell asleep or blacked out or something. And although I was never bored, in the end it felt both too slow and too fast somehow. But those nit-picky complaints aside, amazing!!

When I first watched Dune two years ago I couldn't get enough of the story or the surrounding lore. I read the first book soon after as to immerse myself in knowing what would happen next and to have a better knowledge of the universe. At the time in my mind the first part missed out on some things that I felt were important in establishing the overall story, however after watching the second part I understand what Denis Villeneuve's vision cinematically needed to go a slightly different direction. The battles in the second part were epic and all of the added stuff of Paul training was a fun experience. I'm sad to see the whole story arc of Thufir Hawat as well as Paul's child and his bizarre sister being dropped, but I understand that when it comes to adapting a novel to the big screen that some things aren't as necessary/needed to build for future installments. I loved this movie, it was such a great sequel and is helping further the vision of Frank Herbert.

"Dune: Part 2" had the weight of expectation upon its shoulders, following the success of its predecessor. However, this highly anticipated sequel falls short of achieving the same level of excellence. Directed by Denis Villeneuve, the film struggles with uneven pacing, lackluster character development, and a narrative that feels rushed and heavy-handed.

One of the glaring issues with "Dune: Part 2" is its pacing, which oscillates between dragging in the middle third and rushing through the final third. The film spends too much time on inconsequential events, leaving little room for character arcs to develop organically. Paul's transformation from a reluctant leader to a megalomaniac zealot feels particularly rushed and lacking in depth, robbing the audience of the opportunity to truly empathize with his journey. Having attended a late evening showing there were times I was actually checking my watch, unbelievably so, but I have to admit myself bored particularly past the first hour mark.

Rather than feeling a drama play out in real time, we're simply told drama 'is' playing out. Its a subtle but important difference, but one which needs to be acknowledged. Unfortunately there is no sense of stakes here, instead its just characters accomplishing one task after the other until Paul can eventually become 'The Messiah'. At no point did I ever feel this was under threat, yet apparently according to what the characters are saying, that's EXACTLY how I should be feeling.

Another one of my main complaints was the love story between Paul and Chani, with it feeling forced and clichéd to the nth degree. The lack of chemistry between the two actors was distracting and the on-again, off-again nature of their romance detracted from the emotional weight their relationship is apparently supposed to carry. It's a narrative thread that we've seen countless times before, yet done better in other movies, leaving viewers feeling indifferent rather than invested; I had no real reason to care about these two, other than I was told I was supposed to by the plot. We can call Dune Part 2 a masterpiece all we want, but when the main romance and arguably main backdrop of the second installment feels corny, then we know we've got problems.

The introduction of Austin Butler's Feyd-Rautha character also feels unnecessary and cartoonish. His role usurps that of Dave Bautista's Beast Rabban from the world-building of the first film, only to be disposed of by the end of the sequel. This decision undermines the tension that could and probably SHOULD have been built with Bautista's character and leaves audiences questioning the purpose of Butler's inclusion. Feyd Rautha felt 'evil for the sake of evil' and a mere device to give the hero's of Paul and Chani something to aim at, whilst not actually threatening to alter the plot.

Despite these shortcomings, "Dune: Part 2" does have its strengths, particularly in its visual effects, framing, and atmosphere. Denis Villeneuve once again proves himself a master of his craft, creating stunning visuals that transport audiences to the world of Arrakis. However, these moments of visual brilliance can sometimes feel overindulgent, with scenes of desert landscapes and thumpers dragging on for longer than necessary. Credit where credit is due however....

Ultimately, "Dune: Part 2" fails to deliver a satisfying payoff, with the Emperor's defeat feeling anticlimactic and Christopher Walken's portrayal lacking the gravitas it deserves. While the film runs for a lengthy time, almost none of it is given towards developing his character and giving the audience a reason to care about his potential affect and inclusion in the narrative. Unfortunately he just exists here as a confused looking old man, and the film is poorer for it.

In conclusion, "Dune: Part 2" is a visually impressive but a narratively underwhelming sequel. While it may have been hailed as a masterpiece by some, it ultimately fails to live up to its potential. Those seeking to immerse themselves in the world of "Dune" would be better off sticking to the books, as the film leaves much to be desired, particularly given its lengthy runtime. As a non book reader myself, I sure know where I'll be heading now to get my Dune fix.

If 'Part One' - which I very unfortunately only discovered on DVD due to my distance from any cultural facility when it was released - had difficulty convincing me, it is quite the opposite with this second episode.

A visual festival, to be watched on the most gigantic screen possible, and a philosophical tale sumptuously conceived by the cinematographic genius of Denis Villeneuve, which highlights the talent of his casting. An epic and sublime masterpiece highlighted by a masterful new soundtrack by Hans Zimmer.

Between 'Star Wars' and 'Lawrence of Arabia', this masterful piece of cinema is to this decade what the aforementioned works are to their respective eras.

Even if Denis Villeneuve has declared that he wants to take the time to complete his trilogy, we can only look forward to enjoying a new show of this quality in the years to come.

In the meantime, I will rewatch the first part in hopes of being able to change my opinion.

**Possible Spoilers**

Dune: Part Two takes right off from where the first Dune film left us hanging. And it's just as dreamy yet more ambitious than its predecessor.

Dune: Part Two almost feels like a critique of 'The Chosen One' motif of other movies, and shows the 'pros and cons' of being chosen as a supposed saviour in the eyes of desperate people in a desperate world. What happens for those who are not the 'One'? The world around them gets mighty tricky to navigate, and coming to terms with what is to come... is a lot easier said than done.

Dune: Part Two is equal parts spectacular and unusually somber with its high-concept sci-fi trappings. I'm just glad the two movies can finally complement each other; there's bound to be fan-edits that make it a five-hour-plus feature (or it could become reality via a Director's Cut or something), and fans are gonna dissect every scene on YouTube videos speculating as to what the future holds for the Dune franchise on-screen. And it's a breed of film which deserves that kind of online speculation because it's rich with world-building and foreshadowing that may surprise us when they make Dune: Messiah as a movie.

Sure it's cliche for reviewers to note the Star Wars similarities, but I gotta say that Dune finally becoming a cinematic franchise to compete with it is nothing short of a miracle (even if the book basically willed George Lucas' magnum opus into existence in the first place) that would Frank Herbert proud.

Dune: Part Two is a LOT of movie to digest, but it's no slouch. This is what high-concept filmmaking should strive to be; this is how to channel all that money into something that's worth the effort, and it doesn't have contempt for its audience either. Dune: Part Two can send messages to the rest of Hollywood on how to tackle legacy properties well.

2024's first sci-fi blockbuster does justice to one of the most important novels ever written, and it raises the bar pressuring Hollywood to get its collective asses into high-gear instead of slouching on so-so productions (looking at you, Madame Web).

Dune: Part Two is good stuff. Give it a shot before the spice runs dry at the movies. 5/5 stars.

The first "Dune" was an exceptional film for a largely exposition-based narrative that told half of the story of the main book. It combined the best qualities of both blockbuster spectacle filmmaking and more character driven-style filmmaking for a brilliantly made piece of cinema. But "Dune" fans know that the story only gets more compelling as it goes on, and Denis Villeneuve managed to top himself once again. "Dune: Part Two" is nothing less than an absolute masterpiece that not only manages to top the first installment in just about every way.

The film picks up pretty much exactly where the first film left off, where Paul has just joined the Fremen to try to fulfill his ultimate goal to defeat the Harkonnens and bring peace to Arrakis. As can be expected, the performances are uniformly excellent among the large ensemble cast, and most characters that were in both this film and its predecessor improve on their performance and its character arc and associated range in comparison to the previous film. Timothee Chalamet is gripping as Paul, showing a dynamic emotional core. The same can be said for Zendaya as Chani and Rebecca Ferguson as Jessica. Austin Butler is chillingly menacing as the vicious Feyd-Rautha. The film is absolutely impeccable from an aesthetic standpoint, from the cinematography to Hans Zimmer's score to the superbly detailed production design based on Fremen culture. Scenes such as Paul riding a sandworm are simply awe-inspiring on an excellent premium large format screen. But the most important thing is that the film is so in tune to the themes and character arcs unique to the second half of the story, particularly Paul's insistence that he is a messianic figure, Jessica's support of that notion in large part due to her Bene Gesserit ways, and Chani's refusal of that view and her independence while still being loyal to the Fremen at large. Villeneuve has always been an insightful and character-driven storyteller first through the lens of science fiction, and the nuanced portrayal of those themes is what elevates this film to the next level. Perfectly paced at 2 hours and 46 minutes, the film does an excellent job at portraying the complexity of the book and its characters; and I generally thought that the changes made from the book (and there are a few notable ones) served their purposes and ultimately still contributed to an outstanding film.

Like the very best films, "Dune: Part Two" further broadens our horizons as to what cinema can be. In this case, it does so by showing that blockbuster sequels can be exceptionally dedicated to thoughtful thematic complexity complemented by thorough character development. These elements contribute so much to the film as a whole, and help make it an unforgettable cinematic experience.

Not to be missed. 10/10.

Note: I saw the film in Dolby Cinema, and as can be expected, the picture and sound quality were both superb. You could really feel the impact of the score and other sounds, which further improved the viewing experience.

After seeing all the reviews before watching this movie, i thought it was going to be just another overhyped movie as i didn't think it could be THAT good, but boy was i wrong. The cinematography is some of the best i've seen, and the acting was on a whole other level. It's been a long time since i've seen a sci-fi movie that's had me this invested, where Part 1 failed to do so.

Now here's what i didn't like so much, and it's a strange one. I'm not to keen for movies being all about "the chosen one", which this is. It feels like something you've seen a million times before, although this one does it well. It's an almost 3 hour long movie, and a lot of time goes to Paul just walking around like he's the only one in this movie. It got to a point where i felt like i didn't get to see enough of any of the other interesting people.

Regardless, for the people that struggled to get through the first one, i beg you to watch this. You won't regret it!